This has been an interesting debate. I'm still not sure why none of the posters who claim that Irving is a superior player to Rondo, or think that Rondo can't be the best player on a contending team, refuse to take into consideration the way that Rondo has led this team deep into the playoffs over the course of the past four seasons.

Because it's quite obvious that Pierce, Garnett, and Allen lead this team deep into the playoffs, and now that they're not able to anymore, Rondo can't even lead the team to a .500 record.

Rondo wasn't the best player on any of those contenting teams. He's the best player on the team now, and we're observing the results first-hand.

This.

Paul and KG led our title run.

Paul, Ray, and Rondo in '09.

Paul and Rondo in '10.

The Big 4 were all ok in '11.

KG and Rondo last year.

As you can see, Rondo has never been the focal point of a playoff run. He's always needed one or more of the vets to take on a load.

This year, I have concerns that we are relying too much on Pierce and KG.

First of all he's claiming that the big three and not Rondo led the playoff runs, so you're disagreeing with the post you're agreeing with when you claim it was, for instance, Rondo and KG and not the big 3 in 2012. Secondly, how many players lead teams to deep playoff runs when nobody else on the team takes on a load? Certainly not players like PP, KG, RA, KD, Shaq, Kobe, Wade or Dirk. LeBron maybe?

All me to clarify:

Of all our playoff runs, we haven't had a single player be the main reason we got to where we were. When I hear posters say, "Rondo led us deep into the playoffs," I find that to be absurd. It takes more than one guy for this team to succeed. By that I mean, it takes more than one player to perform well consistently in the playoffs. The list I made above is pretty accurate, to me.

Look, I get that Rondo plays a key part, but I'd be lying if I said, "Rondo's the main reason we made those runs." That's selling the Big 3 VERY short.

So when I say I agree with kozlodev I mean I agree that Rondo wasn't the focal point of our recent playoff success. Rather, it was a mixture of Rondo and the vets. And like I said, we are relying on Pierce and KG WAY too much this year.

Sorry for the misunderstanding. When I used the term "led," I wasn't trying to imply that Rondo did it on his own, or that Pierce and Garnett haven't been major factors in our recent playoff runs.

I do think, though, that ever since our championship season, Rondo has been our most consistent playoff performer.

Rondo wasn't second banana last year and he wasn't in 2010. KG and PP didn't just lose a step right now, this year, for KG it happened when he blew out his knee, for Pierce it's been gradual over the last few years.

Our decline into being a pedestrian team has been gradual over the last few years, too. Though for the record, Pierce has been pretty much the same guy in the playoffs over the last 5 years.

And I have a hard time taking seriously your argument that Rondo wasn't a second banana last year, when Garnett averaged 19 and 10 on .500 shooting

This has been an interesting debate. I'm still not sure why none of the posters who claim that Irving is a superior player to Rondo, or think that Rondo can't be the best player on a contending team, refuse to take into consideration the way that Rondo has led this team deep into the playoffs over the course of the past four seasons.

Because it's quite obvious that Pierce, Garnett, and Allen lead this team deep into the playoffs, and now that they're not able to anymore, Rondo can't even lead the team to a .500 record.

Rondo wasn't the best player on any of those contenting teams. He's the best player on the team now, and we're observing the results first-hand.

This.

Paul and KG led our title run.

Paul, Ray, and Rondo in '09.

Paul and Rondo in '10.

The Big 4 were all ok in '11.

KG and Rondo last year.

As you can see, Rondo has never been the focal point of a playoff run. He's always needed one or more of the vets to take on a load.

This year, I have concerns that we are relying too much on Pierce and KG.

First of all he's claiming that the big three and not Rondo led the playoff runs, so you're disagreeing with the post you're agreeing with when you claim it was, for instance, Rondo and KG and not the big 3 in 2012. Secondly, how many players lead teams to deep playoff runs when nobody else on the team takes on a load? Certainly not players like PP, KG, RA, KD, Shaq, Kobe, Wade or Dirk. LeBron maybe?

All me to clarify:

Of all our playoff runs, we haven't had a single player be the main reason we got to where we were. When I hear posters say, "Rondo led us deep into the playoffs," I find that to be absurd. It takes more than one guy for this team to succeed. By that I mean, it takes more than one player to perform well consistently in the playoffs. The list I made above is pretty accurate, to me.

Look, I get that Rondo plays a key part, but I'd be lying if I said, "Rondo's the main reason we made those runs." That's selling the Big 3 VERY short.

So when I say I agree with kozlodev I mean I agree that Rondo wasn't the focal point of our recent playoff success. Rather, it was a mixture of Rondo and the vets. And like I said, we are relying on Pierce and KG WAY too much this year.

Sorry for the misunderstanding. When I used the term "led," I wasn't trying to imply that Rondo did it on his own, or that Pierce and Garnett haven't been major factors in our recent playoff runs.

I do think, though, that ever since our championship season, Rondo has been our most consistent playoff performer.

Eh, I think KG has been more consistent than Rondo. Defensively, KG is there every night. It's only offensively where he sometimes struggles in the playoffs. Rondo puts up great numbers, don't get me wrong, but he'll have games where he shows up for a half, quarter, or not at all.

Here's the best way I can put my opinion: Rondo is our most talented player in the playoffs, but KG is the most important and consistent.

Sorry for the misunderstanding. When I used the term "led," I wasn't trying to imply that Rondo did it on his own, or that Pierce and Garnett haven't been major factors in our recent playoff runs.

I do think, though, that ever since our championship season, Rondo has been our most consistent playoff performer.

I have no arguments against his contribution, or against the consistency of his performance. But the difference between the space you have to operate with three HoFers in the tail end of their prime, and when you're the best player on the floor is quite evident. And I while I'm sure Rondo can flourish in the former situation, I'm not sure he has the tools to consistently tackle the latter.

Of all our playoff runs, we haven't had a single player be the main reason we got to where we were. When I hear posters say, "Rondo led us deep into the playoffs," I find that to be absurd. It takes more than one guy for this team to succeed. By that I mean, it takes more than one player to perform well consistently in the playoffs. The list I made above is pretty accurate, to me.

Look, I get that Rondo plays a key part, but I'd be lying if I said, "Rondo's the main reason we made those runs." That's selling the Big 3 VERY short.

So when I say I agree with kozlodev I mean I agree that Rondo wasn't the focal point of our recent playoff success. Rather, it was a mixture of Rondo and the vets. And like I said, we are relying on Pierce and KG WAY too much this year.

I tend to agree with this, although I'd claim that Garnett was more instrumental to these runs than any other player on our roster.

I think Rondo is a great player. I think he'll be an amazing second best player, who can absolutely kill you while you're busy stopping the team's best player. But he's patently unfit to be a top dog pretty much for the same reason for which Dwight Howard is: isn't a great scorer, isn't a great shooter, and can't make his free throws.

While I disagree that KG was our best player last year, I can see why the point is arguable. But the argument for KG is on defense and maybe rebounding, it isn't on offense. Teams weren't busy trying to stop KG in the playoffs last year, they generally watch him stand on the perimeter waiting for a pass when he's open. They didn't really load up against a less than healthy PP either. Defenses geared up to stop Rondo more than anyone else. And I agree that Rondo and Howard both have issues on the offensive end and it hasn't stopped Howard from leading a team deep into the playoffs either.

You can harp all you want about his overall contribution to the game (which is undeniable), but the pattern that has emerged from the decline of Pierce and Garnett as primary offensive options is hard to argue with.

The pattern we saw last year was Rondo having a larger load on the offensive end and a trip to the ECF.

Rondo wasn't second banana last year and he wasn't in 2010. KG and PP didn't just lose a step right now, this year, for KG it happened when he blew out his knee, for Pierce it's been gradual over the last few years.

Our decline into being a pedestrian team has been gradual over the last few years, too. Though for the record, Pierce has been pretty much the same guy in the playoffs over the last 5 years.

And I have a hard time taking seriously your argument that Rondo wasn't a second banana last year, when Garnett averaged 19 and 10 on .500 shooting

2 less points, 3 less rebounds, *10* more assists a game. You generally couldn't give the ball to KG and expect him to create anything for himself and others. That job was mainly in Rondo's hands. Take the argument seriously or not, but it's an easy one to make. And Pierce hasn't really been the same guy late in games when you really needed a bucket, which was his bread and butter for years.

Rondo wasn't second banana last year and he wasn't in 2010. KG and PP didn't just lose a step right now, this year, for KG it happened when he blew out his knee, for Pierce it's been gradual over the last few years.

Our decline into being a pedestrian team has been gradual over the last few years, too. Though for the record, Pierce has been pretty much the same guy in the playoffs over the last 5 years.

And I have a hard time taking seriously your argument that Rondo wasn't a second banana last year, when Garnett averaged 19 and 10 on .500 shooting

2 less points, 3 less rebounds, *10* more assists a game. You generally couldn't give the ball to KG and expect him to create anything for himself and others. That job was mainly in Rondo's hands. Take the argument seriously or not, but it's an easy one to make. And Pierce hasn't really been the same guy late in games when you really needed a bucket, which was his bread and butter for years.

I'm not a fan of comparing a C/PF's stats to a PG's stats. Is it really KG's job to get 10 assists? Is it really Rondo's job to get 10 rebounds?

You can harp all you want about his overall contribution to the game (which is undeniable), but the pattern that has emerged from the decline of Pierce and Garnett as primary offensive options is hard to argue with.

The pattern we saw last year was Rondo having a larger load on the offensive end and a trip to the ECF.

I'm not sure where you saw this pattern. Rondo was pretty much the same guy in the playoffs last year that he was in 08-09 and 09-10.

The most discernible pattern from last season has nothing to do with Rondo: it was that Garnett reverted back to his championship form.

Sorry for the misunderstanding. When I used the term "led," I wasn't trying to imply that Rondo did it on his own, or that Pierce and Garnett haven't been major factors in our recent playoff runs.

I do think, though, that ever since our championship season, Rondo has been our most consistent playoff performer.

I have no arguments against his contribution, or against the consistency of his performance. But the difference between the space you have to operate with three HoFers in the tail end of their prime, and when you're the best player on the floor is quite evident. And I while I'm sure Rondo can flourish in the former situation, I'm not sure he has the tools to consistently tackle the latter.

We're past the prime on PP and KG and Ray's on South Beach. Rondo hasn't exactly wilted this year (or last year for that matter).

Rondo wasn't second banana last year and he wasn't in 2010. KG and PP didn't just lose a step right now, this year, for KG it happened when he blew out his knee, for Pierce it's been gradual over the last few years.

Our decline into being a pedestrian team has been gradual over the last few years, too. Though for the record, Pierce has been pretty much the same guy in the playoffs over the last 5 years.

And I have a hard time taking seriously your argument that Rondo wasn't a second banana last year, when Garnett averaged 19 and 10 on .500 shooting

2 less points, 3 less rebounds, *10* more assists a game. You generally couldn't give the ball to KG and expect him to create anything for himself and others. That job was mainly in Rondo's hands. Take the argument seriously or not, but it's an easy one to make. And Pierce hasn't really been the same guy late in games when you really needed a bucket, which was his bread and butter for years.

I'm not a fan of comparing a C/PF's stats to a PG's stats. Is it really KG's job to get 10 assists? Is it really Rondo's job to get 10 rebounds?

In Rondo's case, in the playoffs, it often is his job to get 10 rebounds.

Sorry for the misunderstanding. When I used the term "led," I wasn't trying to imply that Rondo did it on his own, or that Pierce and Garnett haven't been major factors in our recent playoff runs.

I do think, though, that ever since our championship season, Rondo has been our most consistent playoff performer.

I have no arguments against his contribution, or against the consistency of his performance. But the difference between the space you have to operate with three HoFers in the tail end of their prime, and when you're the best player on the floor is quite evident. And I while I'm sure Rondo can flourish in the former situation, I'm not sure he has the tools to consistently tackle the latter.

We're past the prime on PP and KG and Ray's on South Beach. Rondo hasn't exactly wilted this year (or last year for that matter).

Well, he hasn't wowed me. Sure, he's pounded the ball a lot, and he's gotten his stat line (which is pretty much a given, based on the extended minutes he plays). But he hasn't closed many games, and playing with the lesser versions of Pierce and Garnett and Pierce has made us a .500 team.

I'm far from the though of dumping all this squarely on Rondo -- but people who think he'll end up being the best player on a contending team probably have to temper their expectations. Garnett and Pierce may be shells of their Hall of Fame selves, but they're still a pretty darn good supporting cast.

Sorry for the misunderstanding. When I used the term "led," I wasn't trying to imply that Rondo did it on his own, or that Pierce and Garnett haven't been major factors in our recent playoff runs.

I do think, though, that ever since our championship season, Rondo has been our most consistent playoff performer.

I have no arguments against his contribution, or against the consistency of his performance. But the difference between the space you have to operate with three HoFers in the tail end of their prime, and when you're the best player on the floor is quite evident. And I while I'm sure Rondo can flourish in the former situation, I'm not sure he has the tools to consistently tackle the latter.

When you are the best player on the floor and the other players on the floor with you aren't even close to being at your level, you get a situation like the one that Kyrie Irving is currently in in Cleveland.

If Danny keeps Rondo and has him play the next 7 or 8 years with subpar talent, I won't be happy and I won't expect success. I'm sure Cleveland fans feel the same way about their situation with Irving.

This is not really a good argument for trading Rondo for Irving. They are both players that you'll want to surround with as much possible talent as you can to achieve team success. Of course, that can be said for all players.

Celtics fans when a player has a good game against us: OMG HES SO GOOD, LETS TRADE FOR HIM.. RONDO SUCKS, HOW CAN HE BE ALLOWED TO HAVE AN OFF GAME?? WE DONT EVEN CARE WHEN HE HAS A GOOD GAME, WE SHOULD TAKE HIM FOR GRANTED..

I doubt anybody is basing their assessments of either rondo or irving on one game.

Tim, I think you jinxed Rondo. Two straight triple-doubles, two straight losses.

The last two losses have been a great example of why I'd prefer a guy like Kyrie, though. We just don't have a guy who can consistently dominate the fourth quarter. Rondo, as great as his all-around contributions are, hasn't really been able to do that with any consistency.

Tim, I think you jinxed Rondo. Two straight triple-doubles, two straight losses.

The last two losses have been a great example of why I'd prefer a guy like Kyrie, though. We just don't have a guy who can consistently dominate the fourth quarter. Rondo, as great as his all-around contributions are, hasn't really been able to do that with any consistency.